You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
In an earlier work, (Dollander & Tychey, 2002) we suggested that it was necessary to construct a psychodynamic theoretical model of preventive action and to try to use it in the education of children so as to prevent the building of their affective development and to improve harmonious growth.
In order to achieve this, we began by reviewing the principal psychoanalytical contributions to the field of education (Bergeret, 1998; Bettelheim, 1988; Bion, 1962; Cifali, 1994, 1998; Cifali & Moll, 1985; Dolto, 1981, 1984, 1985, 1988; A. Freud, 1930; Lebovici, 1983, 1995, 1997; Miller, 1983, 1984; Winnicott, 1970, 1995). We then singled out the contributions made in France by Francoise Dolto (1981, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1988) for several reasons.
Within the psychoanalytic field, Dolto is the author who has argued with the most conviction that psychoanalysis should not be reduced to a form of curative therapy, or restricted to the understanding of psychopathology and its treatment, merely a theory of personality. This position implied that she accepted psychoanalysis as a means of enlightening educational theory and thus making children's affective development easier.
Dolto is also the psychoanalyst who made it her lifelong commitment to anchor psychoanalysis in education by participating (as did Winnicott) in radio and television programs where she was consulted about education-related problems.
Above all, Dolto was, to our knowlege, the only psychoanalyst to have developed precise, systematized educative reflections in her numerous publications (whereas this type of reflection is much more fragmented in the work of other psychoanalysts).